alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan De Dios MEDINA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-10209.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 18, 2005.

Sue P. Fahami, USRE — Office of The U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Michael K. Powell, Esq., FPDNV — Federal Public Defender’s Office, Reno, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: KLEINFELD, TASHIMA and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

The Supreme Court vacated our judgment entered October 26, 2004, and remanded for further consideration in light of *United States v. Booker,*— U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).

Medina-Hernandez’s Sixth Amendment challenge to his sentencing enhancement, based on a prior aggravated felony conviction, remains foreclosed after *Booker. See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez,*— F.3d -, -, No. 03-30387, 2005 WL 1560269, *8 n. 8 (9th Cir. July 5, 2005) (explaining that a district judge’s enhancing a sentence based on the fact of a prior conviction does not raise any Sixth Amendment problems).

Because Medina-Hernandez was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the sentencing court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to *United States v. Ameline,*409 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). *See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, id.,*at-(extending Ameline’s limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional *Booker*error).

REMANDED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 8 , 2013

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 12

- 01013

- CV

MICHAEL ALDOUS , Appellant

V.
ERIC BRUSS, SILVIA S ANDOVAL, DEBBIE AND DALE O'CONNOR , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 10th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 11

- CV

- 0824

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This appeal is from a judgment signed October 30, 2012. No clerk’s record has been filed. The clerk responsible for preparing the record in this appeal informed the court appellant did not make arrangements to pay for the record.

On November 30 , 2012, notification was transmitted to all parties of the court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless, within2

fifteen days, appellant paid or made arrangements to pay for the record and provided this court with proof of payment. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

Appellant has not provided this court with proof of payment for the record. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Jamison, and McCally.
DANIEL STAHL,

Appellant,

v.

HIALEAH HOSPITAL and 

SEDGWICK CLAIMS 

MANAGEMENT SERVICES,

Appellees.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-3077

_____________________________/

Opinion filed February 3, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims.

Stephen L. Rosen, Judge.

Date of Accident: December 8, 2003.

Mark L. Zientz of the Law Office of Mark L. Zientz, P.A., Miami, for Appellant.

Russell H. Young of Eraclides, Gelman, Hall, Indek, Goodman & Waters, LLC.,

Sarasota, for Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

THOMAS, CLARK, and WETHERELL, JJ., CONCUR.
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D2022-2163

LT Case No. 2020-00015-CF-54

_____________________________

SCOTT MICHAEL LUSCH,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Putnam County.

Howard O. McGillin, Jr., Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Natalie R. Gossett, 

Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Daniel 

Caldwell, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for 

Appellee.

June 25, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, WALLIS, and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1084 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1084

  To promote transparency by permitting the Public Company Accounting 
Oversight Board to allow its disciplinary proceedings to be open to the 
                    public, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 23, 2015

Mr. Reed (for himself and Mr. Grassley) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To promote transparency by permitting the Public Company Accounting 
Oversight Board to allow its disciplinary proceedings to be open to the 
                    public, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``PCAOB Enforcement Transparency Act 
of 2015''.

SEC. 2. OPEN MEETINGS AUTHORIZED.

    Section 105(c)(2) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 
7215(c)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(2) Public hearings.--Hearings under this section shall 
        be open to the public, unless the Board, on its own motion or 
        after considering the motion of a party, orders otherwise.''.

SEC. 3. PUBLICATION OF DETERMINATIONS.

    Section 105(d)(1)(C) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 
7215(d)(1)(C)) is amended by striking ``(once any stay on the 
imposition of such sanction has been lifted)''.
                                 <all>
```
II 

Calendar No. 621 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1007 

[Report No. 114–346] 

To amend the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992 to rename 

a site of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 20, 2015 

Mr. PORTMAN (for himself and Mr. BROWN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

SEPTEMBER 8, 2016 

Reported by Ms. MURKOWSKI, without amendment and with an amendment 

to the title 

A BILL 

To amend the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act 

of 1992 to rename a site of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


ebenthall on DSK30MX082PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1007 RS

1 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE DAYTON AVIATION HER2 ITAGE PRESERVATION ACT OF 1992. 

3 Section 101(b)(5) of the Dayton Aviation Heritage 

4 Preservation Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 410ww(b)(5)) is 

5 amended by striking ‘‘Aviation Center’’ and inserting 

6 ‘‘National Museum’’. 

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘A bill to amend the 

Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992, and 

for other purposes.’’. 


ebenthall on DSK30MX082PROD with BILLS

ebenthall on DSK30MX082PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 621 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1007 

[Report No. 114–346] 

A BILL 

To amend the Dayton Aviation Heritage PreservaAviation Heritage National Historical Park. tion Act of 1992 to rename a site of the Dayton 

SEPTEMBER 8, 2016 

Reported without amendment and with an amendment to 

the title 


ebenthall on DSK30MX082PROD with BILLS
3/19/2004

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

Case Number: P040346/0347 Assessor: Lee

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES

Scenario#: 1 Number of Release Sites: 4. 

Release Activity: Use

Release Description: WATER LANDFILL INCINER LAND/INCIN FUGITIVE

Total Releases: 984.00 1000.00 1000.00 0.00 0.00

(kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)

Release Days/yr: 60. 0. 

Per Site Release: 4.10 250.00 250.00 0.00 0.00

(kg/day) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/day)

Remarks: Release is to air OR incineration OR water. Incineration release is below threshold of

concern.

Consumer use expected?
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

CASE NUMBER:P040346C

SIC-CODE BASED HUMAN AND AQUATIC EXPOSURES TO SURFACE WATER RELEASES

SCENARIO #:1 RELEASE ACTIVITY:Use

SIC-CODE DESCRIPTION:POTW (Indust., includes POTWs which receive ind. disch.)

SIC-CODE (S):4952 EXPOSED POPULATION:Adult

WASTE WATER

TREATMENT REMOVAL 

(%)

COC

(μg/L)

RELEASE

DAYS

PRE-TREATMENT

RELEASE 

(kg/day)

POST-TREATMENT

RELEASE 

(kg/day)

BCF

(L/kg)

90. 1000.00 60. 4.1 0.41 0.00

AQUATIC EXPOSURE ESTIMATES - SURFACE WATER

PLANT

TYPE

% ILE

FACILITY

STREAM FLOW (MLD) STREAM CONC. (:g/l)

Harmonic

MEAN 30Q5 7Q10 1Q10

Harmonic

MEAN 30Q5 7Q10 1Q10

ALL 50 311.58 116.44 75.70 61.91 1.32 3.52 5.42 6.62

ALL 10 32.75 11.98 7.19 5.98 12.52 34.22 57.02 68.56

DRINKING WATER AND FISH INGESTION EXPOSURE ESTIMATES

Exposure Units

Drinking Water Results Drinking

Water Units Fish Ingestion Results

Fish

Ingestion

Units

50% 10% 50% 10%

Cancer

LADDpot 1.69E-06 1.61E-05 mg/kg/day 0.00 0.00 mg/kg/day

LADCpot 8.65E-05 8.23E-04 mg/L 0.00 0.00 mg/kg

Chronic Non-Cancer

ADDpot 4.22E-06 4.01E-05 mg/kg/day 0.00 0.00 mg/kg/day

ADCpot 2.16E-04 2.06E-03 mg/L 0.00 0.00 mg/kg

Acute

ADRpot 2.94E-04 2.86E-03 mg/kg/day 0.00 0.00 mg/kg/day
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

CASE NUMBER: P040346C

SIC CODE EXPOSURES TO SURFACE WATER RELEASES

SCENARIO #: 1 RELEASE ACTIVITY: Use

SIC CODE DESCRIPTION: POTW (Indust., includes POTWs which receive ind. disch.)

ASSOCIATED SIC CODES: 4952 from 1011-1999,2211-5199,5511-5599,7211-8099

SIC CODE RESULTS

COC (:g/L) % yr exceeded Days/yr

exceeded

Release

days/year

Loading

(kg/site/day)

Waste Water

Treatment (%)

High/Avg

Analysis

1000.00 2.88E-03 1.05E-02 60 4.10 90.00 High
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

CASE NUMBER:P040346C

DRINKING WATER EXPOSURE ESTIMATES FROM LANDFILL RELEASES

SCENARIO #:1 ACTIVITY:Use

RELEASE DESCRIPTION:

EXPOSED POPULATION:Adult

NUMBER OF

SITES LANDFILL RELEASE

(kg/yr)

LANDFILLED SLUDGE

(kg/yr)

MIGRATION FACTOR1

DRINKING WATER

TREATMENT

 (%)

4. 1000.00 0.00 0.00(Negligible) 0.00

 Exposure Units Results

ASSUMPTIONS

ED

(years)

AT

(years)

BW

(kg)

IR

 (L/day)

Cancer

LADDpot (mg/kg/day) 0.00 30.00 75.00 71.80 1.40

LADCpot (mg/L) 0.00 30.00 75.00 NA NA

Chronic Non-Cancer

ADDpot (mg/kg/day) 0.00 30.00 30.00 71.80 1.40

ADCpot (mg/L) 0.00 30.00 30.00 NA NA
Exhibit 99.2

VERTEL CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of
Vertel Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Craig S. Scott, Vice President Finance &
Administration, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18  U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Ss 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (3) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                    
| | (4) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

|/s/ CRAIG S. SCOTT                                                                                              | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|                                                                                                                | 
|Craig S. Scott Vice President Finance & Administration, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary November 19, 2002 |
Animal and Plant

Health Inspection

Service

Veterinary Services

Strategy and Policy

Live Animal Imports 

4700 River Road

Riverdale, MD 20737

(301) 851-3300, opt. 2

July, 2021

USDA recognition of Live Bird Markets agreement as it 

relates to weekly testing for Influenza A Virus by Drost 

Farms Ltd. (Canada) and recipient of poultry shipments,

Watkins Poultry Merchants of New York (U.S.)

In response to the detection of influenza A virus (including Low Pathogenicity 

Avian Influenza H5N2 and influenza A virus subtype H2N2) in live bird markets in 

the northeast United States, APHIS recognizes the informal agreement between 

Drost Farms Ltd.(Canada) and Watkins Poultry Merchants of New York(United 

States). Drost Farms Ltd. has agreed to weekly testing of influenza A virus in live 

poultry which they export from Canada to the United States to further ensure no 

evidence of communicable disease is present in these flocks.

U.S. import requirements state that each flock and hatchery must be inspected by a 

veterinarian within 30 days of import, there is no evidence of Newcastle disease or 

any communicable disease of poultry found, and the poultry in the flock have not 

been exposed to any such disease during the 90 days immediately prior to the 

inspection date. Weekly testing was an industry voluntary response to the detection

of LPAI, H5N2, at one of the farms in 2016. More recently, there has been an 

emergence of an influenza A virus H2N2 live bird marketing system strain in the 

northeast U.S. live bird markets since 2017. Increasing testing frequency for 

influenza A virus improves safety and security of the live bird markets, as well as

all susceptible poultry in the United States and Canada.

Flock testing protocols specific to influenza A virus detection have been approved 

by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Negative test results of the weekly 

samples should accompany each import shipment and made available for USDA 

APHIS staff at U.S. ports of entry and New York State Veterinarian, at the NY 

Agriculture and Markets Agency. 

For any additional questions, contact Dr. Bettina Helm at (301) 851- 3362 or

Bettina.Helm@usda.gov.

Safeguarding American Agriculture

Federal Relay Service

APHIS is an agency of USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Programs (Voice/TTY/ASCII/Spanish)

An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer 1-800-877-8339
August 31, 2004

25290

#### State v. Feldstein

Affirmed
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2



              FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE
             JUNE 3, 1999 BETWEEN INSURANCE AUTO AUCTIONS, INC. AND
                             CHRISTOPHER G. KNOWLES

          WHEREAS, Insurance Auto Auctions, Inc. (the "Company") and Christopher
G. Knowles (the "Executive") have entered into an Employment Agreement effective
as of June 3, 1999 (the "Agreement");

         WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to amend the Agreement as set
forth herein (the "First Amendment");

         NOW, THEREFORE, Company and Executive agree as follows:

1.       The fourth, fifth and sixth sentences of Section 3(c) of the Agreement
         are deleted in their entirety and replaced with the following:

         The Company shall pay up to $42,000 on Executive's behalf for
         membership in a club as mutually agreed upon by Company and Executive.
         Such $42,000 payment shall represent the non-equity portion of the club
         membership initiation fee. Executive shall make all initiation fee
         payments representing the equity portion of the club membership. Upon
         termination of Executive's employment, the club membership shall remain
         an asset of Executive. For the term of Executive's employment, the
         Company will reimburse Executive for reasonable annual dues related to
         the club membership.

Except as expressly amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.

This First Amendment shall be effective as of the 27th day of July 1999.



<PAGE>   2



         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First
Amendment.


                                              COMPANY:


                                              By /s/ T. J. O'Malia
                                                --------------------------------

                                              Title: CHAIRMAN


                                              Executive:


                                              /s/ C. G. Knowles
                                              ----------------------------------
#### Taniguchi v. Namuo

17233

10/25/94

Affirmed
February 10, 1998

20278

#### State v. Stefanov

Affirmed
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7236

ALBERT THOMAS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus BONNIE BOYETTE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-03-637-5-H) Submitted: January 26, 2005 Decided: February 17, 2005 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Thomas, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallace-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Albert Thomas, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Thomas has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 0579-0127. The time required to 

complete this information collection is estimated to average .5 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. 

OMB Approved 

0579-0127 

EXP.: 06/2026

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE 

VETERINARY SERVICES 

AGREEMENT TO CONDUCT 

EQUINE INFECTIOUS ANEMIA (EIA) TESTING 

I, _____________________________________________, have read and understand Veterinary Services Guidance (VSG) 15201.1. As the 

Laboratory Director I understand my responsibilities and agree to abide by the guidelines therein. The requirements include, but are not limited to, 

the following: 

1. Provide and maintain adequate and appropriate facilities as described in VSG 15201.1 and the associated inspection checklist.

2. Provide technical personnel, suitable to perform official EIA testing, trained at NVSL and with successful completion of individual proficiency

test(s).

3. Accept only samples submitted by a Category II Federally accredited veterinarian authorized in the State where the sample was obtained

and submitted with a properly completed and legible official test form (VS 10-11).

4. Conduct all testing in accordance with the official protocol(s) for the test as provided by NVSL, as described in literature accompanying the 

diagnostic test kits or in VSG 15201.1. 

5. Use only diagnostic test kits that have been approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 

6. Submit all non-negative samples to NVSL for confirmation (those testing positive, suspect, discrepant, or equivocal in any of the licensed EIA 

diagnostic tests, as defined in the diagnostic test kit in use or NVSL protocols). 

7. Seek, and satisfactorily meet, annual laboratory proficiency (check) test requirements, per NVSL protocols and deadlines. 

8. Expect to perform at least 500 EIA tests per year, in order to maintain testing competency.

9. Meet regulatory obligations regarding prompt reporting of results to State and Federal officials.

10. Provide appropriate resources for adequate record keeping and to meet the summary data requirements described.

11. A satisfactory annual inspection is required to maintain approval.

12. Maintain current contact information and respond to official requests and inquiries.

I understand that the laboratory will lose its approval if it fails to comply with any of the provisions in VSG 15201.1 or if personnel trained to conduct EIA tests 

are no longer available to conduct EIA testing. 

Laboratory Name: Laboratory Physical Address: 

Laboratory Telephone Number(s): 

Director Email Address(s): 

Laboratory Director Name: 

Laboratory Director Signature: Date Signed: 

VS Form 10-15 

APR 2018